Lancaster diocese smokes out the secularists

I have been remiss in not posting something about the excellent document from Lancaster Diocese, "Fit for Mission? Schools." This is part of a diocesan Mission Review and has received widespread praise, including an enthusiastic endorsement from Archbishop Mauro Piacenza, Secretary for the Congregation for Clergy who said,

The Congregation is especially pleased as your pastoral plan is precisely that which was called for in the "General Directory for Catechesis" after the release of the "Catechism of the Catholic Church"'

"To be honest, I have been overwhelmed by the positive response! Before Christmas, my office was inundated with congratulations, enquiries, and requests for copies of Fit for Mission? Schools from within the diocese, from around the country and internationally."

I have not read the whole document yet but even just skimming through, I am bowled over by it. I know that trads may pick holes in one or two bits of it but frankly this is in a different league from anything I have seen in terms of school policy in over 23 years as a priest. Here are one or two quotations that give you an idea of why it has had such an enthusiastic reception. In the initial action checklist, one of the "actions" for creating a Catholic ethos is:

Create / enhance

Respect for the authority of the doctrinal and moral truth safeguarded by the Pope and the Bishops

Another "action" under Pillar 1. Profession of Faith is:

Use the CCC

CCC in library

CCC for each teacher

Primary schools - one classroom set of the compendium

Secondary schools - one classsroom set of the CCC and the compendium

Train Teachers in the use of the Catechism

The document also recommends schools to arrange a Corpus Christi procession and to check that Sunday Mass is included in all school trips or activities taking place over a weekend. Schools are encouraged to pray for vocations and to identify possible candidates. The schools are told not to refer pupils to outside agencies for counselling on matters related to sex since "this is the prerogative of the parents". The checklist also includes the question,

"How do we empower our pupils with the absolute truth of Catholic doctrinal and moral teaching?"

Discussing this with other clergy, I suggested that the "crunch" will come when a school receives its Diocesan Religious Inspection and gets a bad grading for not following the policy. There are plenty of ways that a Headteacher or Governing Body could make trouble for the Diocese. And it seems that the allies of such troublemaking are already digging in and positioning their artillery.The Observer reports (MPs challenge 'doctrinaire' bishops):

Barry Sheerman, chairman of the parliamentary cross-party committee on children, schools and families, said he had heard of other cases and felt that behind the scenes there was 'intense turmoil' about the future of Catholic education. 'A group of bishops appear to be taking a much firmer line and I think it would be useful to call representatives of the Catholic church in front of the committee to find out what is going on,' he said. 'It seems to me that faith education works all right as long as people are not that serious about their faith. But as soon as there is a more doctrinaire attitude questions have to be asked. It does become worrying when you get a new push from more fundamentalist bishops. This is taxpayers' money after all.'

It is an amazing admission on the part of a senior parliamentary figure that he thinks that it is all right to have "faith schools" as long as people are "not that serious about their faith." It is no surprise to find this but it is a surprise to see it stated so baldly. It seems as though everyone just assumes that Catholic schools are not going to be all that serious about their faith. It is ludicrous to characterise Bishop O'Donoghue as a "fundamentalist" but clearly anyone who takes the Catholic faith seriously is considered to be such.

The National Secular Society goes further and calls the mild-mannered bishop's perfectly balanced and sensible approach to Catholic education "a Taliban-style regime of Catholic orthodoxy". (NSS - Religion in schools – long overdue for a radical rethink) It was the NSS which first gave the story to the Observer and they seem to feel that they have Ed Balls in their circle of influence:

It is time for Ed Balls to do what other education ministers have not had the guts to do – tell the Archbishops and the bishops that their time is up in schools.

It seems that they may be right in their assessment of the Schools Secretary as we see from this sinister snippet:

Asked about his opinion on faith schools, Mr Balls said they were being monitored and that measures would be taken if they proved to be "divisive".

To be honest, I am not confident that we will win the battle with the secularists for our schools: we have given in for so long that we no longer have the resources within Catholic Education circles for the fight. As I have suggested, it is likely that much of the most serious trouble will come from people within the Catholic education system itself: senior staff, governors and officials who will be outraged that the Church should suggest that they actually follow the teaching of the Catechism and other documents as "The Truth and Meaning of Human Sexuality". But it is good to see that in at least one diocese the education department will go down fighting.

Popular posts from this blog

I am happy to pass on the following information concerning the forthcoming Colloquium of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy. Unfortunately I will not be able to attend myself this time, but I pass on the notice with my support and recommendation.
Booking is now open for the Autumn Colloquium of the Confraternity of Catholic Clergy, which this year takes place at the National Shrine of Our Lady of Walsingham, from Wednesday 15th till Thursday 16th November.

Speakers include Bishop John Keenan of Paisley, Monsignor John Armitage (Rector of the Shrine at Walsingham) and Father John Saward.

I am trying to pray the Office each day. Should I only use the official breviary or can I use the Little Office of Our Lady?
The second Vatican Council encouraged lay people to pray the Divine Office; indeed the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy encouraged parish priests to see that Vespers are celebrated in Churches on Sundays, something that is quite rare nowadays. So it is an excellent practice for you as a lay person to pray at least a part of the Office. By doing so, you unite yourself to the whole Church in the prayer which Christ offers up as our High Priest. It is rightly called a sacrifice of praise when we pray the psalms to sanctify the hours of the day.

Priests and religious are bound to celebrate the Divine Office every day and must use the Office that is approved for them. Secular priests, for example, must use either the Liturgy of the Hours (the Office that was composed after Vatican II) or the older breviary that was approved before the Council. Lay people who are no…

When I was a student in Rome, I remember going with a priest for Mass in one of the ancient Churches. The priest said that he was going to use Eucharistic Prayer II because it was the most ancient of all the prayers and was specifically Roman, composed by Hippolytus. This was the standard view at that time (early 1980s) but has since been called into question. A number of people have recently mentioned the matter to me and so here are a few notes for you.

In the 19th century, a number of ancient texts were discovered that were similar to the "Apostolic Constitutions", (of which the first modern edition was published in 1563). Among these texts was a document which came to be referred to as the “Egyptian Church Order”. In addition, the Canons of Hippolytus and the Testamentum Domini were discovered.

The scholarly consensus in the early 20th century on the dependence of these documents was that the “Egyptian Church Order” was in fact the "Apostolic Tradition" of Hippol…

Dilexit Prior in Letters from a Young Catholic asked some useful questions today about indulgences. I thought it would be best to do a post here especially to cover the controversial question of detachment from venial sin. But first the other questions:

The conditions for gaining a plenary indulgencePope Paul VI set down a number of norms relating to indulgences at the end of Indulgentiarum Doctrina. Norm 7 states:To acquire a plenary indulgence it is necessary to perform the work to which the indulgence is attached and to fulfil three conditions: sacramental confession, Eucharistic Communion and prayer for the intentions of the Supreme Pontiff. It is further required that all attachment to sin, even to venial sin, be absent. If this disposition is in any way less than complete, or if the prescribed three conditions are not fulfilled, the indulgence will be only partial, except for the provisions contained in n.11 for those who are “impeded.”It is worth reading the other norms because …

The first is the most fundamental. Kwasniewski rightly says that it should be engaged before examining any particular principle behind the new lectionary. It is the question of the purpose or function of reading the scriptures at Mass. As he puts it:
“Is it a moment of instruction for the people, or is it an element of the latreutic worship offered by Christ and His Mystical Body to the Most Holy Trinity.”
He affirms that what we may call the doxological purpose is primary.

This question determines any subsequent discussion of what passages are chosen, how they are distribut…